So as a PSA to my Rottie comrades, I post this hysterical YouTube vid:

In other news, Arnie apparently saved a Yorkies life today, just by being his goober self.

So we were on our walkie this afternoon, when Arnie starts pulling backwards. Me: “WTF Arnieman?”

Turn around, this teeny Yorkie had gotten away from her mama and was going on a joy-run, making a beeline for me and Arnie. Her poor mama was an older lady, and there was no way she was going to catch her pup before she got to Arnie, so I just stopped and let Yorkie catch up. No point in walking away, cause Yorkie was gonna follow us anyway. Besides, Arnie follows the same rules as Max— if the dog is smaller than you, PLAY! Bigger– Assume play, prepare for fight. I knew Yorkie was in no danger.

So Yorkie zips up to Arnie and Arnies tail is all waggy and everybody is happy.

Just when Yorkies mama is about to catch up, Yorkie realizes the joy-run is almost over, and tries to bolt again. I stomp on her leash and hold it until Mama gets to us. She thanks me for catching her pup, we laugh at this 6 lb dog fearlessly introducing herself to another pup ten times her size, hehe.

I turn around to continue our walk, and who do I see but The Dog With One Eyebrow, no more than 25 yards away, eyeballing the whole situation. TDWOE is a neighborhood off-leash, intact male pit bull (he has owners, theyre just too fat and lazy to walk him. its easier just to let him roam about and terrorize the neighborhood). Hes bitten Arnie once, and Arnie remembers this fact vividly. So before Arnie sees his nemesis, I turn on my heel and walk back towards Yorkie to avoid TDWOE, and warn Yorkie mama.

I dont think anything of it, but Yorkie mama gasps “If your dog hadnt stopped [dogs name I forgot] she would have run straight into the jaws of that other dog before I could catch her!”

Comments

Living in the deep south at the moment, I notice a cultural note that a lot of people seem to overlook. For most people around here, the term pitbull or even bulldog is not considered a reference to a breed at all. Not in the way most people define breed.

If you were to correct someone here that your ‘pit’ or ‘bulldog’ is, in fact, a Presa Canario, you’d probably just get an odd look. You would have just blurted a non sequitur. After all, they weren’t saying your dog was an APBT — they were just categorizing him as part of a group of breeds with similar look and behavior. Pit, pitbull, and bulldog are often used as DESCRIPTIVE nouns rather than something intending to reference a dog’s pedigree.

Google ‘pitbull breeds’ or ‘bulldog breeds’ and you’re likely to end up with examples of this phenomenon. It’s far too often ignored when speaking of pitbull statistics.

The problem with the pit bull is that it has a strong jaw and sharp teeth, compared to, for example, a cocker Spaniel, which has a much less dangerous bite.

And now we see in #11 and #12 that PalMD has essentially taken the same position.

Nice use of the poem, too. But I could have guessed using that poem as a model would tick off PalMD et. al, even though if–I remember correctly–some of your annecsters are also Jewish.

And another thing, in #14, you point out that only about 30 people die from dogs. If I told you that only about 50 children died from Chicken Pox each year (and most of those were due to complications), would that change your mind about the chicken pox vaccine?

And another thing, in #14, you point out that only about 30 people die from dogs. If I told you that only about 50 children died from Chicken Pox each year (and most of those were due to complications), would that change your mind about the chicken pox vaccine?

If the side effects of the chicken pox vaccine were the abandonment or euthanizing of potentially thousands to hundreds of thousands of loyal, loving, family pets and animals clearly capable of experiencing emotions at an almost humanlike level, whatever they cognitive abilities; perceived vindication of ignorant, impulsive, reactionary measures for nearly invented problems; and the deadliest side effect of all – a false sense of security – then this discussion might be worth having. Especially if very few of those deaths were actually caused by strains included in the vaccine, despite popular belief.

OK, usually I lurk, but I can’t help it. These ignorant comments from what I thought was a rational scientist are leaving me with my mouth hanging open. PalMD? Seriously?

If you actually want to learn something, this is a good place to start.

I thought a scientist would be better at risk assessment. There is nothing but the most facile and flawed evidence that breed is at all predictive of injurious attack. Especially when compared to actually predictive variables like, THE BEHAVIOR OF THE OWNER. Which is even mentioned in that stupid CDC report but for some reason is ignored.

Also, re: “Let’s kill all the breeds that I consider dangerous and then we can all own “safe” breeds like cocker spaniels! It could save AT LEAST 3 LIVES A YEAR, GUYS!”

LOL, yay! Because, unlike “pit bulls” breeds, they are prone to an actual, diagnosable health condition called “cascading rage syndrome” which causes them to attack without warning. So is another “safe” breed, the golden retriever! But I guess those breeds didn’t show up in the only study you have to cite, and everything else is “anecdote” so doesn’t count.

Aaaaaaand one more thing. If you want actual, thoughtful discussion of the relationship of breed prejudice and racism that goes a tad deeper than “OMG, I’m so insulted that you call the mass slaughter of a type of dog base solely on its looks racism! They’re just dogs, after all!”

“If I told you that only about 50 children died from Chicken Pox each year (and most of those were due to complications), would that change your mind about the chicken pox vaccine?”

When the varicella vaccine was licensed in 1995, chicken pox was killing about 100 people a year in the US and hospitalizing 10000. As of 2005, the mortality rate had dropped by at least 74% (90% in preteen kids) and as of 2002, the hospitalization rate had dropped by 74-88%. And that was back when they were only recommending a single dose.

You’d probably find that proper Dachshunds would be the next to go in your scenario. They can be quite viscious when they are annoyed, I still have the scar down the side of my face after I was bitten by one (long story, all you really need to know is that I annoyed him a bit too much).

*“Once the drug dealers and dog fighters took a liking to pits, they went from having a reputation as “nanny dogs” to that of horrible killers. Shameful. And it can happen with any breed.”
Exactly. It’s only a matter of time before it happens to toy poodles. I hope we can all agree that roving hordes of toy poodles do no one any good.
*“You abuse a dog, you cant act surprised when shit goes down, no matter the breed.” Minor quibble- why would people be more likely to abuse pits? Poodles I could see getting kicked down stairs. But why abuse a sweet pit?“Arnies current sweater is bright blue with beaded snowflakes, with a white fur collar.”
Oh. Oh my. So that’s how they get homocidal.

*“Because unless you’re wearing a suit of bacon, she’ll ignore you.” You’re right to have a dog should NOT impinge upon my right to use bacon soap!

“And enough with the Niemöller. It has indeed taken on a life of its own. And, if it’s offensive to Jews, then it is to Communists and Social Democrats, too. Yet I don’t see them whining.”
Hey Jackass! Actually, it’s communist, socialist, trade unionist and then Jews. And I am or pal around with all of em. And you don’t see us whining because we are too busy plotting your destruction.
ERV, writing it up like the Niemoller poem = sick puppeh territory. On par with Lollercaust.

Speaking of which- Tyler, I’m gonna hunt you down, tattoo you with some swastikas, and leave you ball-gaged, naked, and tied to a streetlight somewhere in Grand Crossing. Bigoted prick.

I used to think I was a moral person but I discovered yesterday that I related a sequence of events to another human being. I think this really means that I have a subconscious desire to trivialize the Holocaust, and that this desire was leaking out through improper language laden with all kinds of chauvinistic subtexts that I didn’t even know were there! To be honest, I didn’t even know I was sick.

Well, I’ve checked into a program of sensitivity training. Hopefully this will turn out well for everyone, especially the people I’ve hurt by my explicit recording of a causal chain of events. That was really inexcusable.

ERV- Actually, I really do dislike toy poodles. ’twas an attempt at humor. I realize tone does not properly come across sometimes, and I was intentionally going for different tones with the different bullet points, so I see how I failed to convey that.

And I’ve read the whole thread. Either you are trying to say: “oh, just because I implicitly compared BSL to facists Nazis adovcating genocide, doesn’t mean I was actually talking about Nazi fascist genocide.” – in which case, you coulda just said “my bad” about the connotations and your utter lack of tact (srsly, how hard is that?); OR you knew exactly what you were doing, and think the holocaust is hilARious. In which case, you’re just a fucking moron. And I’m a Jew, not Vietnamese, so if I went to Orac’s people would start bustin my chops for being “an oh so sensitive liberal politically correct dork who has to get all outraged over EVERYTHING” (plus, I simply didn’t care; I don’t fucking read Orac, because he’s a hypocritical EEJIT; so nothing he says matters to me. If you have independently concluded Orac is a Sick Puppeh, I can only commend your powers of observation).

Im not apologizing for anything because that poem/Nazis never crossed my mind while writing this post. I actually started writing it using ‘And DEEEEEEEN…’ from ‘Dude, Wheres my Car’, but I decided that was too awkward and changed it to a simple, ‘First, then, then’ to describe a series of possible events. I edited my post in response to Pal to try to fix ‘implied’ connections to the poem.

Ive had to deal with this shit before, and Im not playing these games with Pal or Kwok or anyone else.

Either you are trying to say: “oh, just because I implicitly compared BSL to facists Nazis adovcating genocide, doesn’t mean I was actually talking about Nazi fascist genocide.” – in which case, you coulda just said “my bad” about the connotations and your utter lack of tact (srsly, how hard is that?); OR you knew exactly what you were doing, and think the holocaust is hilARious.

If you could tone the drama down a few megatons, you might see that those two are not the only possibilities. Making a comparison of any aspect of the Holocaust does not automatically mean that the Holocaust as a whole is being belittled or that it’s hilarious or any of this other projection bullshit. Nor does it mean that the default position would be to presume the worst meaning by the post so you can take offense.

And fine you’re not Vietnamese; the question is, do you think Vietnamese people are owed an apology for Orac’s post title? Or like me, do you think such people should get over their self-important selves?

There is nothing liberal about waiting around for, or even manufacturing, opportunities to fly into a moral outrage. Liberals are not afraid of language or ideas, and they don’t pretend that they have a lens which can strip away niceties to reveal a pack of prejudices hidden behind a poorly chosen pronoun, or behind the cosmetic and likely accidental resemblance of a list of statements to a popular poem.

Paranoid indictments and persecutorial fervor are authoritarian and illiberal to the core. I’d never call someone a liberal who uses propriety as a bludgeoning instrument, who automatically assumes the worst motives behind harmless colloquialisms, and who seems to enjoy the thrill of standing on a pulpit and denouncing others on the suspicion that they might secretly be bigots. And suspicion is all it takes, isn’t it? After all, when Abbie realized that readers could take it as a play on “First They Came…”, she changed it! That’s how someone acts when they want to avoid possible misunderstanding. But, no, the mere suspicion that she’s been insensitive is apparently something for which there is no redemption.

I really don’t know if I think dangerous dogs should be banned. Rather, owners should be required to take out insurance. Good luck getting home owners insurance if your agent finds out you have a dangerous bred. I know my company charges extra for that.

domesticated predator:domesticated predator :: weapon:toy

By your rationalization a sword is the same thing as a pocket knife, and if you’re allowed to carry one in public, you should be allowed to carry the other, too.

How exactly are breeds going to be defined as “dangerous?” Purely by statistics (dog bites, deaths)? What would the cut-off be? And what about mixed breeds? What about mutts that just “look” like a pitbull or other dog on the dangerous breed list? (Not to mention that “pitbull” isn’t even a breed!)

Actually, Limp Willy, a pocket knife and a sword are very similar items. I can carry either publicly, as long as I’m not being threatening. In a similar vein, pitbulls are very little different from any other domesticated predator, and should only be a problem when they act in a threatening manner.

Your pathetic analogy: fail. A pocket knife will kill you just as quickly as a sword in the right hands. A cocker spaniel will kill you just as quickly as a pit with the wrong circumstances.

you might want to check your local statutes first, actually. at least in the USA, edged-weapons laws are not infrequently more restrictive than firearms laws, in no small part because there is no National Sword And Knife Association.

plus, as usual when it comes to weapons laws, some edged-weapons rules are just flat out silly. but let’s not get me started on switchblades right now, that’d be too much of a threadjack.

Spartan- well, have any Vietnamese stepped forward to say the post makes them uncomfortable? I’m not aware of a history that would make the use of “napalm-grade stupidity” offensive. In fact, although I suspect Orac was going for an extreme form of the “the stupid, it burns!” notion, the phrase could be interpreted as a denouncement of the stupidity of using napalm, which would seem to be a relatively rational and pro-Vietnamese position. But if it comes across as offensive to someone, I think it’s worth at least trying to see it from their point of view, rather than patting ourselves on the back for how chill we can be at something that hurts someone else.

Erv- I understand what was intended with the post now, and I don’t think it was in any way a veiled display of bigotry or anything like that. I’m convinced you didn’t think of the original poem at all when writing the post. That said, I hardly think you can expect people to *not* be reminded of that poem, given how closely the structure of your words resemble it.
I can also understand how what must seem like a hair-trigger-sensitive outcry is not going to make you feel warm ‘n fuzzy enough to apologize for hurting anyone’s feelings. That said, when you offend someone *on accident*, I don’t know that it’s rational to disparage them about how oversensitive they are. It seems that’s jumping straight to offending them *on purpose*, which totally undermines any of your (legitimate!) protestations of innocence.
Anyway, even if others are on the same page as I am, and accept that you totally didn’t mean it to relate to anything offensive, that might not be enough for them to quite fully let you ‘off the hook’ so to speak.
You see, there’s a reason people don’t always care about intent. If a white atheist in Louisiana decides to burn a cross on a black preacher’s lawn to make fun of religion, and then says “oh, I never even thought of the KKKonotation!”, they’d be (rightly) cast as an idiot, who is part of the reason why we are stuck tolerating some level of bigotry in society.

Keep goofing, but I would not be afraid of the most vicious cocker spaniel. My wife doesn’t like being libeled by being branded a victim of spousal abuse, either, but it doesn’t surprise me that some of the low lives that visit here are willing to stoop to that level when logic fails them.

In fact, although I suspect Orac was going for an extreme form of the “the stupid, it burns!” notion, the phrase could be interpreted as a denouncement of the stupidity of using napalm, which would seem to be a relatively rational and pro-Vietnamese position.

Eh? If you’re trying to draw some distinction between Orac’s and ERV’s posts here, it makes no sense. Wasn’t ERV’s post a denouncement of the stupidity of rounding up and exterminating a mostly harmless group (human or not) based on some hysterical perception of risk? If we apply the same standards you do here, that would be a “relatively rational and pro-Jewish position”, no?

That said, I hardly think you can expect people to *not* be reminded of that poem, given how closely the structure of your words resemble it.

And what if she had referenced the poem, what exactly would be so horrible and unforgivable about that – as long as she isn’t claiming that BSL is morally equivalent to what the Nazis did? Do you object to any analogizing of humans and animals? Or is it comparing the Holocaust to anything that’s much less tragic than exterminating millions of people? (Then maybe you should be offended by Niemöller, since that’s what he does in the poem.)

If a white atheist in Louisiana decides to burn a cross on a black preacher’s lawn to make fun of religion, and then says “oh, I never even thought of the KKKonotation!”